Sometimes it is in our country's best interests to help foreign countries in crisis, whether their leaders are Black, Brown, or Green. Let us take
Haiti for example.

If the US and other wealthy countries did nothing in Haiti, Haiti would descend into abject chaos. Anarchy and disease would spread throughout the
country and eventually make its way onto our shores. It makes sense for the US to donate some aid so Haiti does not go into a death spiral and take
out its neighbors with it.

ah, ok I see they inherited all their problems, I see, it is the "lets blame Bush" technique.
Ok well how about we take an insiders point of view like lets say the gentleman that wrote the article in the OP?

I am glad you at least looked into the Haiti Dominican Republic comparison. Let us keep in mind that when the blacks took over Haiti it was a
paradise.

In the 1700’s what is now Haiti was called the “Jewel of the Caribbean,” and supplied about 40% of the world’s sugar. In 1791 the
government of France passed legislation to phase out slavery in its Caribbean colonies and grant the former Negro slaves citizenship. Rather than
becoming citizens, Haiti’s Negro population mass murdered all whites and Mulattoes who could not flee the Island in time.

In 1804 only full blooded Negros remained and Haiti became the first Negro ruled nation.
www.floort.com...

Haiti was a paradise to who? During the slave days I bet Haiti was a paradise to the 1% who lived a very comfortable life off the backs of slave
labor. I don't think the slaves would have called Haiti a "paradise." The same can be said of South Africa during apartheid. It was a great
place to be if you were White. It sucked if you were Black. Now South Africa sucks for everybody because Whites get less special privileges.

I do not wish to make excuses for Black leaders by using a "blame Bush" technique. I would state, rather, that much of the world looks down on
Black people. Most people in the west would not let a Black guy run something unless it were already broken. You got a chicken and egg argument
going. Is New Orleans messed up because it is run by Black people? Or is New Orleans run by Black people because it is messed up?

I really don't see Haiti going into any more of a death spiral then what they were already in. We'd just have to get our bananas and nuts
elsewhere. You want to give them aid? Give them an education. That way they can understand how the worlds banks keep screwing them and keeping them in
abject poverty. They can learn how to fend for themselves and not have to rely so heavily on outside influences who don't give a rats a** about them,
only themselves so they can puff out their chests and say " we helped save the world, what did you do today?"

A whole continent is difficult to `sum up`. Each country with its unique culture history and heritage .
One cannot ignore the indigenous population experiences with former colonial overlords . If ever a continent needed therapy Africa is it.
Some of the atrocities are mind boggling in scale frequency and duration . All of this just can`t be sweep aside .

The colonial masters may no longer reside in Africa .... but there is still a potent influence .

The International Monetary Fund ,World Bank and various international aid agencies assert influence over nations policies in return for financial
Aid.
A government (whatever the colour of their skin) can have all the lofty idealist notions of nation building they like - but when the international
money men insist on privatising state owned asset's ,devaluing your currency , reducing state interventions and subsidies . Your projects die
.......and you become another disillusioned leader who has fallen into line .

The cookie cutter democracy model , will not work . Each nation will have to to be free to find what suits their culture best , taking a greater role
- leading. Their is no denying a tribal structure underpins many of Africa's nations .... can this be reconciled within a nation state ?..... i don`t
honestly know.

As somebody already stated :: Education would also be my starting point ...... one cannot expect a relatively uneducated population (no matter how
bright and enthusiastic) to run complex institutions . Of course all of this requires political stability over time and serious funding .

===============================================
As the custodians of the cradle of civilisation i wish them well .
An African continent at peace ..... is a step closer to a more enlightened age of humanity .
===============================================

Originally posted by UmbraSumus
A whole continent is difficult to `sum up`. Each country with its unique culture history and heritage .
One cannot ignore the indigenous population experiences with former colonial overlords . If ever a continent needed therapy Africa is it.
Some of the atrocities are mind boggling in scale frequency and duration . All of this just can`t be sweep aside .

The colonial masters may no longer reside in Africa .... but there is still a potent influence .
========================

Very true.

Well actually Africa is now emerging from the neocolonial stage. If anyone believes that the colonials just up and left WITHOUT any system of
maintaining the pipeline of influence (theirs) and resources (African) then please U2U me as I have three Brooklyn bridges and Georgia to sell them!

1. Even though New Orleans has been under Democratic rule for 75 years, it does not mean that it was always ruled by one ideology. 50 years ago,
southern Democrats were more or less ideologically identical to today's Republicans. You cannot compare a contemporary democrat to an old-time
southern Democrat. In fact, the old time Southern Democrats were not Black, but were closely aligned with the KKK!

2. Reagan was not as great a president as everyone paints him out to be. He spend money like a drunken sailor and ran up the deficit more than any
fiscal liberal did. The only fiscal liberal that outdid Reagan was George W. Bush.

Yeah, that's right. I called Reagan and George W. Bush fiscal liberals. Both spent too much money!

3. I don't think the lemons into lemonade analogy holds. It is not as if the world says, "let's give the Black guy lemons and let us see if he
can make lemonade." Lemons may not be lemonade, but they have potential. I think the world says, "I don't want anything to do with festering hill
of dog crap. Let's dump it off on some Black guy." You are not criticizing Black leaders for failing to make lemonade out of lemons, you are
criticizing them for not making lemonade out of dog crap.

Look what Obama is doing to America he took the lemons that GB2 left him and he is now proceeding to toss them into the garbage disposal.

why????? could it be because his black side is making him do it?

Sorry, but you lost control of the thread when you shifted focus from "Africans" to black people in general. You are aware that there is a
difference, right?

There are black people all over the world. There are Africans who are not black. Yes, native Africans.

I am beginning to think (flame shield: go!) that the entire purpose of this thread was to devolve into the argument that Obama is not fit to lead
because he is "black".

BTW: Simply disclaiming that you are 'half Mexican' (there are white people in Mexico, too), have black friends and 'date blacks without any
problems' does not make your comments any less racially divisive. In fact, the whole 'dating blacks' thing was a very odd choice of words. Frankly,
it seems a little tacked-on, if you understand my meaning.

EDIT to add: I agree that the leadership in Africa is in dire straits, but I don't believe it has anything to do with the skin-color of the leaders.
Africa is an economic nightmare after several hundred years of colonial exploitation. Add to that the almost complete absence of infrastructure across
90% of the content, and the constant civil wars/genocide/coups, and you have one major recipe for disaster.

However, that has nothing to do with skin color. If white people inhabited Africa natively, and black people had colonized, pillaged and exploited
them, it would be the exact opposite today. There might be a black fellow on the internet raising the question of whites' ability to lead.

WSe should also remember that the West is had some very public issues of corruption and the American system is inherently corrupt according to the ATS
boards.

There is a lot of snouts in the trough in the West in general. TPTB look after their own of can cover their misdeameanours in a way that Africa
cannot. Africa just lacks the resources to run the interference to prevent the facts from surfacing.

I am glad you at least looked into the Haiti Dominican Republic comparison. Let us keep in mind that when the blacks took over Haiti it was a
paradise.

In the 1700’s what is now Haiti was called the “Jewel of the Caribbean,” and supplied about 40% of the world’s sugar. In 1791 the
government of France passed legislation to phase out slavery in its Caribbean colonies and grant the former Negro slaves citizenship. Rather than
becoming citizens, Haiti’s Negro population mass murdered all whites and Mulattoes who could not flee the Island in time.

In 1804 only full blooded Negros remained and Haiti became the first Negro ruled nation.
www.floort.com...

This is a really interesting example of revisionist history. Obviously the entire purpose of the 'article' (I hesitate calling it that), is to paint
an even dirtier picture of the Haitian revolution and make it seem as if black people on the island went insane.

France basically enacted abolition of slavery in its Caribbean Colonies just so it could gain the support of the populace in emerging conflicts with
the British and the Spanish. After Toussaint l'Ouverture, a former slave, defeated the British and the Spanish forces on the island, France decided
to change its mind about abolition, and Napoleon sent a force of 20,000 men to oust l'Ouverture and retake the island.

It was only after the French attempted to reinstate slavery within the country that the final push towards independence was made.

I'm not going to sit here and say that it was a noble cause for the slaves; the fighting was brutal and thousands died on both sides. However,
painting the Colonial French as benevolent overseers and the native Hatians as murdering nutjobs is rather.. misguided.

I think this is a good post and a very difficult question. Someone mentioned that maybe our way of life is not for them, that is a good point. The OP
responded, should we let them live in mudhut's and sleep on dirt?, lol. Are you saying our western style of civilization is better then, say, tribes
in South America who have lived a completely self sustaining life in the jungle generation after generation, and left almost zero footprint on earth?

Obviously, when having the opportunity to govern themselves, things have become very corrupt and violent. However it should also be noted, that this
is the natural evolution of creating power structure's such as Government. And to understand this has nothing to do with locality or race, all you
have to do is study the history of Europe, Asia, America... as we all have gone through this process, though it may have happened for us, long ago.

So in my opinion, to ask if WE should let THEM govern THEMSELVES, is a very arrogant question. It should also be said, that THEY have always, since
Ancient Egypt at least, had an outside influence set on keeping THEM destabilized and powerless so THEY cannot utilize their resource rich terrain.

Of course they have also contributed to their own destabilization throughout history, but until THEY are given the chance like WE were, to build and
grow without an outside influence messing with them, in my opinion they cannot be judged in this manner. The same goes for the Middle East in my
opinion.

But again, this is a great topic to be discussed and a very difficult one to properly address. At some point it has to come down to, do we trust them
like we trust ourselves, and if not, do we do to them what we fear they will do to us? And will that create a better world? I think history can answer
this.

so given the chance without outside influence...you mean like in Haiti after the French were slaughtered?
what did the black Haitians do with their new found freedom and self governance?
the answer is obvious.

I agree, it is a difficult thing to face but, there is some races that cannot govern themselves. Blacks and Middle Easterners are two.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.